Pics of WOTC Minis... NOT 40-65mm

[Bagpuss]

Strange the painting looks as poor as the ones on the Mage Knight figures to me, IE: no shading at all, block colours that 'go outside the lines'. That fire elemental looks like its all one colour the only shading coming from the natural light.

I thought the fix for facing in 3.5 was just making the retangular bases square.

 

[KnowTheToe]

I thought the fix for facing in 3.5 was just making the retangular bases square.

I believe you are right.

No the paint job is not awesome, but common street thugs, orcs etc don't have to be breath taking and you don't have to paint them. for better paint jobs you could pay $20+ per fig on Ebay.

 

[Bagpuss]

For better paint jobs you could pay $20+ per fig on Ebay.

Or just do them yourself. You don't have to be Micheal Angelo to do a better job any Mage Knight type figure. I'm not the most talented minature painter in the world but a simple wash and a dry-brush over a basic colour can do wonders.

 

[Ashrem Bayle]

I like them, but I'm still not to happy with them being random.

 

[Adam Coath]

I think the figure line is a great idea.
I like having nice hand painted figs, but I don't have time to paint models for every D&D creature. Even though the figs are low quality compared to hand painted pewter or plastic figs, having a few of every common monster is great.
The fact that you just throw into a bag and not worry about them being damaged means that you don't have to lug extra figure cases with you to carry all your monsters.

 

[Skade]

They may have left the bases round for ease with turning the mini's on the board. Facing would be apparent by the actual face of the model, and only larger monsters (those which facing would really matter for) will have the square bases. Total speculation though.

The coloring does not bother me on the mini's, partially because when I buy these it will be only to supplement my already sizable miniature collection, and use on the battlefield. For important characters, I'll still use my Reaper and other minitaures for those, which I've painted myself. As to the random packaging. I don't mind that because I may end up grabbing a few miniatures I would not normally buy, due to a lack of excitment about painting them, or some other reason. Ones I would not want to especially buy, but would not mind having should I need them for a game.

 

[Davelozzi]

Does anyone have a guess what king of creature the green mini with the white bug eyes is supposed to be? (Third picture down, first one showing actual minis, not boxes).

 

[Zenon]

Does anyone have a guess what king of creature the green mini with the white bug eyes is supposed to be? (Third picture down, first one showing actual minis, not boxes).

I think it's supposed to be a Troglodyte, it looks similar to the chainmail one below:

edit - picture didn't work, heres the hyperlink:
http://www.svgames.com/882880000.html

2nd edit - Or it might be a kuo-toa. My guess is a Trog.

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

Looks like a dead ringer for the Chainmail Kuo-Toa to me.


Edit: Regards bases, I much prefer round to square, even when in use on 1" battlemats. I find it's easier if the base doen't take up the entire square, so you can turn the mini so it "looks good" during the battle without your base knocking into the mini next to it. I converted most of my early WOTC minis to round bases to match my Chainmail figs.

Larger figs could get round 40+ mm bases, which work well for 10 x 10 foot sizes.

Round bases are also a plus if the game is played WH style on a blank playing field with tape measures -- though I'd hope the mini and system could accomodate either method to attract wargamers and D&Ders alike.

 

[Gizzard]

I'm not the most talented minature painter in the world ....

Is this yours? Bagpuss Eldar Banshee

Just for a frame of reference on what your standards are for pre-painted minis. (And whether you'd be more likely to pay $20 on EBay or sell something for $20 on EBay. ;-)